California Supreme Court Voids Gay Marriages in San Francisco

SAN FRANCSCO, Aug. 12 &#0151; The California Supreme Court ruled today that more than 4,000 same-sex marriage licenses issued in San Francisco are "void and of no legal effect," dealing a heavy blow to gay rights groups.

The ruling came in a lawsuit brought against the city by the state attorney general and a conservative Christian group. Citing a state law, approved by voters as Proposition 22, that defines marriage as between a man and a woman, they had argued that Mayor Gavin Newsom of San Francisco exceeded his legal authority in February by directing the county clerk to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. The court fully embraced the plaintiffs' argument.

"This conclusion is consistent with the classic understanding of the separation-of-powers doctrine &#0151; that the legislative power is the power to enact statues, the executive power is the power to execute or enforce statutes, and the judicial power is the power to interpret statutes and to determine their constitutionality," the court ruled.

Though the seven justices were unanimous in finding that Mr. Newsom had exceeded his authority, they were divided, 5 to 2, in ruling that the 4,000 or so licenses already issued are void.

Mr. Newsom had argued that he could order the licenses issued because he believed the state ban on same-sex marriage to be unconstitutional. The justices today did not address the constitutional question, which is the subject of a separate lawsuit in San Francisco Superior Court. But they did say that should the existing marriage law ultimately be found unconstitutional, "same-sex couples then would be free to obtain valid marriage licenses and enter into valid marriages.`

The ruling was praised by opponents of gay marriage as a major victory in their nationwide effort to preserve marriage in its traditional form. Members of the Alliance Defense Fund, the Christian group that sued the city over the same-sex marriages, celebrated across from the Supreme Court building in San Francisco.

"The justices have restored the rule of law in California," said the Alliance Defense Fund's senior counsel, Jordan Lorence, who argued the case before the court in May. "The decision shows that same-sex `marriage' is not inevitable. Same-sex `marriage' loses whenever a state puts it before voters."

Gay rights groups had expected the ruling against Mr. Newsom, but had hoped that the court would not throw out the 4,000 marriages until the broader constitutional issue had been decided.

"It is a sad day for all the wonderful couples in San Francisco, but we know this is not the end," said Alice Leeds of Parents, Families and Friends of Lesbians and Gays, a gay rights group in Washington. "The future lies in fairness for gay and lesbian families."

The San Francisco marriages were halted on March 11 by an injunction issued by the State Supreme Court.

The city and several legal groups subsequently sued the state, asserting that laws limiting marriage to heterosexual unions are unconstitutional, an argument similar to the one that led to the legalization of gay marriage in Massachusetts.

In its ruling today, the court emphasized that it was not ruling on the merits of same-sex marriage but on the principle of the separation of powers in government.

"The same legal issue and the same applicable legal principles could come into play, however, in a multitude of situations," the court said in its ruling. "For example, we would face the same legal issue if the statute in question were among those that restrict the possession or require the registration of assault weapons, and a local official, charged with the ministerial duty of enforcing those statutes, refused to apply their provisions because of the official's view that they violate the Second Amendment of the federal Constitution."

Christine Hauser contributed reporting from New York for this article.